Hasselblad 503CW, two lenses, faulty focus

[Helinophoto]

Hello

I've been using my Hasselblad 503CW for a while now, since I bought it (used) and I've never really felt very confident with it/liked it all that much.

The reason is, that focus if often off on portraiture-shots, even though I could have sweared with my 20-20 vision that the image was sharp in the viewfinder.

So I did some test today, at infinity, just to check.

Carl Zeiss planar 80mm F2.8: Tried forusing on an object 3-4 km away. Had to turn the focus-ring back to 5 meters (about) 16 feet before the image appeared at its sharpest in the viewfinder.

Carl Zeiss Tessar 160 CB F4.8: Had to rotate the focus ring back to around 100+meters (about halfway between the last digit and the infinity-mark on the lens), before the image appeared to be sharpest.

The Tessar seemed to be most "correct" regarding this simple focus test.


Does anyone know:
- Why there are differences between the two lenses regarding infinity focus?
- What is off on my camera, really? (lens/screen?)

My focusing screen is original, as far as I know.
It is of a clear type with a split screen, however, the screen itself consists of two parts:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

- One part with a matte-side and a shiny side, this part does contain the split-image prism.
- One part which is clear and has a hole for the split-screen, it also has a freshnel-side.

Right now, they are mounted so that the matte side is towards the mirror and the freshnell-side is toward my eye, is this correct?

I was thinking about doing a bulb focus test with a screen at the film-plane, however, where to place the focus screen? The film-magazine has a few mm thickness, so that the film doesn't actually lie directly on the back of the camera, right?

Any good ways to check focus using a second ground-glass at film plane?

If anything, I finally got clear(!) what the issue was with this camera, at least now, I know I cannot trust it.

Can it be fixed at home, or do I need to send it away on a lengthy and expensive CLA?

 

[cowanw]

That is not a Hasselblad GG screen. And that is your problem. (likely)

 

[Helinophoto]

Really?

The frame it lies in seem to be correct from the descriptions and photos I've seen though.

Sure it's not just an older type?

Not easy getting hold of good screens these days, tried getting a bright screen, but I keep finding Chinese ones :/

 

[RalphLambrecht]

Really?

The frame it lies in seem to be correct from the descriptions and photos I've seen though.

Sure it's not just an older type?

Not easy getting hold of good screens these days, tried getting a bright screen, but I keep finding Chinese ones :/

I bought a couple of these Chinese screens.Mine have a split screen;not very bright but focus accurately.

 

[Slixtiesix]

Looks like a Chinese knock-off. They can be found on Ebay. Definitely no authentic screen.

 

[Sirius Glass]

The screen may not be in the right place plus the camera may not be square. The first you might be able to adjust; the second needs a Hasselblad repairman with the Hasselblad body jig.

 

[Helinophoto]

Ok, I double-checked the internet, and it seemed that all the screens I found there, had the screen itself "higher" up in the frame, compared to mine (longer "feet" on the frame).

Thus, my matte-part of the finder, was too low.

I corrected this issue, by placing the matte part (with the split-screen) as the "top glass", closest to the eye, matte side pointing to mirror, and the clear part (with the freshnel) as the lowest one, freshnel pointing to the eye.


Strangely, now both my lenses seem fine at infinity........

I'll do some "fence-testing" tomorrow and see how accurate it is on typical portraiture-distances.

Don't like split-screens though, my Mamyia RZ 67 II has just a plain screen and I never miss the focus at all with that one, focus just snaps in.
With my Carl Zeiss Tessar 160 CB F4.8, the split-screen blacks out and is impossible to deal with on my Hasselblad, and the split-screen really "gets in the way" and makes focusing slow and tedious, especially during hand-holding and portraiture.

Will be checking eBay

 

[Slixtiesix]

Yes, installing the screen face down is a classic way to spoil your focusing. I´m glad that the problem was that easy to solve...

 

[analogman]

Ok, I double-checked the internet, and it seemed that all the screens I found there, had the screen itself "higher" up in the frame, compared to mine (longer "feet" on the frame).

Thus, my matte-part of the finder, was too low.

I corrected this issue, by placing the matte part (with the split-screen) as the "top glass", closest to the eye, matte side pointing to mirror, and the clear part (with the freshnel) as the lowest one, freshnel pointing to the eye.


Strangely, now both my lenses seem fine at infinity........

I'll do some "fence-testing" tomorrow and see how accurate it is on typical portraiture-distances.

Don't like split-screens though, my Mamyia RZ 67 II has just a plain screen and I never miss the focus at all with that one, focus just snaps in.
With my Carl Zeiss Tessar 160 CB F4.8, the split-screen blacks out and is impossible to deal with on my Hasselblad, and the split-screen really "gets in the way" and makes focusing slow and tedious, especially during hand-holding and portraiture.

Will be checking eBay

Yes, I agree, the one you have is a cheap knock off copy. If you do look on ebay, make sure you get the acute-matte screen. These are the later ones and are brighter then the earlier ones. If you just use the waist level finder or any finder with no meter in it, it is fine to use the older type. But if you use a newer metered prism finder, then the readings are going to be off, by I think up to 1 stop as the older screens are darker then the newer acute-matte ones. Maybe anyone on here knows by how much the meter is going to be off?
Hope this makes sense.

The Hasselblad screens have a metal frame and the glass is one piece. The original acute-matte focussing screen that should have been fitted when new is the plain screen with the cross in the middle. I would say, get that one if any...

Cheers,

Michiel

 

[Helinophoto]

Ok, thanks =)

Yeah, this two part thing was a bit confusing, since it wasn't really mounted upside-down, it was in the wrong "sandwich" order, so to speak.

Thanks for the tips concerning a new screen. I use the WLF only, so I really don't need a metered prism (I always meter with my iPhone-app anyway, since I like the wysiwig feel you get and it is correct and very easy to use so...